The Christian's Handbook of Manuscript Evidence

I don’t think there’s a man alive today that can defend the Authorized Version close to than Dr. Peter Ruckman. When I first learned of him by watching his YouTube videos I was sometimes turned off by his attitude but after a while, I could see to his valid points. Man if I could turn back time I would have loved to have met this man and attended Pensacola Bible Institute in Pensacola, Florida which he founded. I did do the next best this by purchasing almost every book he authored and I highly recommend any serious Bible Student to read Dr. Peter Ruckman’s books and the KJV, of course, to draw closer to our creator.

I enjoy brother Ruckman's teaching on the word of God. I love his commentaries, and many of his other works. This one is good, but you need to really know the background of the KJV to get into it. With that said I would highly recommend it to anyone grounded in the word of God.

Shows that the problem with the new versions is more than just manuscript evidence. It is a heart attitude and a lack of faith by the scholars. As Dr Ruckman points out, no one is totally neutral when it comes to the Bible issue. Either you believe that God gave us a perfect book or you don't believe it. The new versions are rooted and grounded in pagan philosophy as well as the opinions of an educated class that knows nothing about faith. The manuscripts for the KJV has its roots in ordinary people throughout history that believed what they had came from God Himself. The witness of God is on one set and not the other. Take your pick.

Dr. Ruckman, for those who know his writing, is extremely prejudiced in favor of the Textus Receptus. He gives sufficient evidence and explanation in this book to have convinced me he is right, though. His writing is full of rhetoric, and sometimes I wish he would explain more of what he is talking about rather than make snide or sarcastic remarks.This man is a real scholar however; a real professor; and he has obviously gone into great depth in his studies. I would love to see him get in a debate with Kurt Aland or Bruce Metzger!If you can ignore the capitalization and italicization of words for emphasis, and pay close attention to his arguments rather than being put off by his style of writing, I think you will see this is a solid and informative book. It's definitely a classic and it isn't out of date either, even though it's old.

The information in this book is so important to any bible believing Christian and has never been refuted. If you notice that the negative comments are simply from people that hated Dr Ruckman. I never met him but if you dig in to this issue of bible versions it's blatantly obvious that every word he wrote is true. He was abrasive at times but it seems that he's been attacked repeatedly and endlessly by so called loving Christians. Read this book for yourself then simply compare the verses described in your King James Bibles with ANY of the modern versions and realize clearly that what he says is ABSOLUTELY true.

great!

Peter Sturges Ruckman (born 1921) is an American Independent Baptist pastor, and founder of the Pensacola Bible Institute. He has written other books such as  King James Onlyism versus Scholarship Onlyism , The Death of Biblical Doctrine , How to Teach Dispensational Truth , etc.He wrote in the Preface to this 1970 book, “The purpose of this book … is to present new evidence which has been uncovered since the theories of Westcott and Hort were presented to the English Revision Committee of 1881-1884. These antiquated theories have been disproved many times since their inception, but the reading public (and in particular the ministerial students at Seminaries) has not been notified of the advancement in knowledge… This work has not been written in the ‘popular language’ so that it will not be as dull as most works on Textual Criticism and Manuscript Evidence. It is plainly a ‘criticism’ of sorts, and pleads guilty to the label… This Handbook will enable the Bible believing student to handle any problems which may arise from those who resent, disbelieve, ignore, or ridicule the [Authorized Version] New Testament text. The problems of sources are defined and analyzed, the evidence of the ‘fathers’ and the ancient versions is discussed, the manuscripts are listed, the answer to ‘archaic words’ in the A.V. 1611 is given, the problems of variance between Greek Receptus and the A.V. English are taken up, the newer translations are compared, the Roman bias of the Westcott and Hort text is demonstrated, the theories of the A.V.’s critics are analyzed and dissected, proof is given for the superiority of the A.V. 1611 English over the ‘Original Greek,’ and above all… the discussions are made to stand within the framework of ‘Truth’ as defined by the Bible itself. At no place does this Handbook assume the so-called ‘neutral approach’ when it deals with manuscripts that attack the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ…”He states, “It does not take a man with a Master’s degree to see that what the Select Group calls ‘Septuagint Papyrus’ is a collection of fragments written 200-800 years too late to be connected with anything that would resemble a ‘Septuagint.’ People who believe that there was a Septuagint before the time of Christ, are living in a dream world. The Hebrew believers (from 4 B.C. to the conversion of Paul) had a complete and authoritative Hebrew Bible which God gave to the Hebrews (Rom 3:1-4) for them to use… [The Septuagint] was plainly an attempt by the individuals referred to in Romans 11:20, 25 and Jeremiah 33:24 to replace the ‘oracles of God’ with the conjectures of Alexandrian Greek philosophy…It does not take a high school graduate to see that this collection of Chester Beatty papyri proves nothing except that somebody, long after the New Testament was completed, tried to translate the Hebrew into Greek.” (Pg. 50-51)He argues, “if the ‘shorter reading’ is the best one, then Vaticanus and Sinaiticus should both be scratched at the start of the investigation; they both contain a half dozen books that have been ADDED to the scriptures [i.e., the Apocrypha]. Is it not more reasonable to suppose that the A.V. 1611 represents a purified text which has, at last, ‘cleaned up’ from the corruption of 13 centuries?” (Pg. 82)Of Mark 16:9-20, he says, “The correct reading is found in every Greek manuscript in the world (that contains Mark) except Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. This ratio is better than 100 to 1. When any scholar says that ‘the better manuscripts’ omit the passage, or ‘the oldest manuscripts’ omit the passage, or ‘the verses from 9 on “are not in the Greek,”’, he is telling you that 2 manuscripts containing the Apocrypha … are more authoritative than 200 Greek manuscripts which read as the A.V. 1611!” (Pg. 132)He attacks the members of Bible “revision committees,” asserting that they ‘are usually high up in the political world, and have “mixed motives” in regard to Bible translations… They do NOT fear and tremble at the reading of the true word of God… They have an affinity for Egypt… They are optimistic about world peace… They are DEISTS in their approach to translating. They assume… that there is no such thing as a book written under inspiration… They can be spotted in any generation by a smooth, slick, scholarly vocabulary, and the adoption and use of words that are not in the Bible vocabulary…” (Pg. 141-142)This forcefully stated defense of the KJV will be of great interest to “KJV Only” advocates; but Ruckman’s sometimes strong “ad hominem” attacks may also turn away some potential readers.

GREAT BOOK